Copyright © 2026 Authors retain the copyright of this article. This article is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

@article{205506,
        author = {Himanshu Singh},
        title = {A COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF THE AMENDMENTS TO THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA AND USA},
        journal = {International Journal of Innovative Research in Technology},
        year = {2026},
        volume = {13},
        number = {1},
        pages = {7146-7159},
        issn = {2349-6002},
        url = {https://ijirt.org/article?manuscript=205506},
        abstract = {A constitution is the main and working document of any country. The Indian and United States constitutions are the foundational legal written documents of the world's two largest democracies and have distinct processes for amendment. This project talks about the comparative analysis of these amendment procedures, highlighting their similarities, differences, of the Indian Constitution and American Constitution. The constitution cannot be amended as per the will of the legislatures. There must be certain limits for amending the constitutions of the country. This project also talks about the limitations which are imposed on the procedure while amending the constitution in both India as well as in the USA. The United States Constitution has relatively rigid amendment process given in Article V. It requires a proposal by two-thirds of both houses of Congress or by a national convention called for by two-thirds of the state legislatures, followed by ratification by three-fourths of the states, either through their legislatures or by conventions. It has amended only twenty-seven times since its establishment in 1787. On the other hand, the Indian Constitution which adopted in 1950, provides a more flexible amendment procedure under Article 368 of Part XX. Amendments can be initiated by the introduction of a bill in either House of Parliament and must be passed by a special majority (two-thirds of the members present and voting, and a majority of the total membership of each House). Certain amendments that affect the federal structure also require ratification by the legislatures of not less than one-half of the states. This tiered system allows for relatively more frequent amendments, addressing the evolving needs and aspirations of a diverse and dynamic nation. This project will provide analysis into the historical context and will also explore the practical implications of these differing amendment processes on constitutional interpretation, judicial review, comparing landmark amendments. This project aims to provide a critical understanding of how each country adapts its foundational law while balancing the principles of constitutional supremacy and popular sovereignty. Ultimately, this comparison will highlight on the strengths and weaknesses of both amendment models in ensuring a living and relevant constitution.},
        keywords = {},
        month = {June},
        }